Anaconda wrote:What caused dinosaur bones to be turned into mineral?
I have no reason to think that's even the case, so I feel no compulsion to explain it.
Anaconda wrote:What caused dinosaur bones to be turned into mineral?
Julian Braggins wrote:I cut slices of petrified wood
Julian Braggins wrote:I know what is petrified wood
Julian Braggins wrote:fossilised bone I've seen was in precious black opal
Julian Braggins wrote:the one I dug was not fully fossilised, little more than hard clay
Anaconda wrote:What caused dinosaur bones to be turned into mineral?
StalkingGoogle wrote:I have no reason to think that's even the case, so I feel no compulsion to explain it.
Anaconda wrote:This is a science forum and you have made an assertion that there is no such physical process as "fossilization".
Anaconda wrote:So, if you don't think the material constituting, quote 'fossilized' unquote, dinosaur bones, is a mineral, which numerous scientists have identified as a mineral; then in your opinion, what is the material, if its not mineral?
Anaconda wrote:StalkingGoogle, you have decided to participate in a science forum and make an assertion, then another participant has asked you to answer a relevant question in regards to you assertion; it is 'good form' to provide a responsive answer.
Anaconda wrote:StalkingGoogle, your statement, "...I feel no compulsion to explain it.", Is non-responsive to my quesion.
Anaconda wrote:Please answer and explain what the material constituting the dinosaur bones is in your opinion.
Anaconda wrote:Also, please cite and link (since readers already know you have the ability to link outside sources) evidence supporting your contention.
Anaconda wrote:If you will not, I and other readers can only conclude you are not participating in good faith on the forum.
I know what most people see in a museum that's called "dinosaur bone" is actually a plastic model of an entire organism based on a few (possibly) bone fragments. It's ludicrous on its face.
I am skeptical of this process called "fossilization". I've never seen it demonstrated in a lab or even read about it being demonstrated in the lab.
I cite the entire sum of human knowledge and technical achievement, which in its entirety can't seem to reproduce this "fossilization" process even once.
-carving bones out of rocks, a hoax that's been perpetrated so many times history has lost count of them all.
You don't have to be a professional paleontologist to collect the remains of ancient life. Anyone can find fossils. All you need is some basic information, a good location, and a lot of patience.
StalkingGoogle wrote:Need I go on?
At this site http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i3/musicman.asp it says: The Liscomb Bone Bed has probably thousands of frozen unfossilized dinosaur bones — some of them have the ligaments still attached. This site http://www.christiananswers.net/dinosaurs/alaska/trip-jul18.html says:The Liscomb bone bed has produced the most important dinosaur remains from Alaska. We collected bones on and below the surface. We found both fossilized and unfossilized bones. We dug down about three feet to get to the bones frozen in permafrost. It was the frozen unfossilized bones we were seeking for our research, although we collected some fossilized bones as well. Both types were found together (I'm not sure how to explain it).
Sparky wrote:Are you saying that dinosaurs never existed?..
Sparky wrote:It is not necessary to have lab reproduction to formulate a theory.
Sparky wrote:Maybe someone with some chemistry/geology experience can point us to experiments that suggest fossilization can occur.
Sparky wrote:You make a claim.
Sparky wrote:That is just nonsense!
Sparky wrote:Suggesting that All recovered bones are part of a hoax
Sparky wrote:only demonstrates obsessive compulsive ignorance
Anaconda wrote:A reasonable implication of StalkingGoogle's post is that in his opinion dinosaurs never existed.
Anaconda wrote:You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.
Anaconda wrote:Dinosaur bones where the original biologically formed calcium has been replaced by non-biologically derived mineral have been found
Anaconda wrote:You, in turn, are disputing this well documented fact, therefore, you are the claimant and I am the skeptic to your claim.
Anaconda wrote:in my opinion, you have no evidence to support your assertion
Lloyd wrote:This thread has several posts that mention lab proof of fossilization: http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=123.
I can make an equally valid competing claim about your obsessive compulsive ignorance.
- For their experiment, Shin and his colleagues used pine and poplar boards from a local lumber store, cutting the wood into small cubic samples. Once the samples were cleaned and cut, they were soaked in hydrochloric acid for two days and then soaked in silica solution for another two days. After the wood had been air-dried, the pieces were placed into a furnace filled with argon gas and steadily heated to 1400 degrees Celsius, where the samples baked for two hours.
- Finally, the samples were cooled to room temperature in an atmosphere of argon.
- The finished product was silicon carbide, a ceramic version of the wood, which was petrified as if it had been trapped in sediment for millions of years. The material "replicates exactly the wood architecture," Shin said.
Sparky wrote:You are making the outrageous claim that fossilized bones are a hoax!
Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest